History of Science Recs

[wynntir]

Hi all,

So I'm feeling a bit lost, even after reading through all the related topics here, and would appreciate any and all advice. I'm a current undergrad double major in Secondary Education and History at a large state research University. My capstone professor has convinced me to consider grad school for history, rather than education, which was my original plan. I am considering just doing a MA, but finding one in my field that is funded seems pretty impossible. I'm not sure if I want to devote myself to applying for a PhD right off the bat because I'm not sure of my chances, and I've had my eye on a education PhD program at Stanford that I am very unqualified for at the moment without teaching experience.

I have a 4.0, had an internship at a medical archive that included a publication, I've worked in public history as a historic tour guide for the last 4 years, I own my own (unrelated) business, and I spent the last three summers teaching an inner city summer school. By the time I graduate next fall I will have student taught. I have at least two very strong letters of recommendation from professors who know and love me, and my writing skills are very strong. All that being said, I don't have any volunteer/extracurriculars outside of one sport because I work full time, and I did transfer into my program with just a 3.8 from a very different major. I know that all of these things don't determine my admittance, but coming into this blind, I don't know if I would be considered for the top institutions or if I should aim lower.

I really want to focus on public reactions to public disease in 20th century U.S. My senior capstone focused on the beginnings of the anti-vax movement within the failed 1976 influenza vaccine. A project I'm particularly interested in given my background is the intersection between public education and disease. I've been researching programs for fall 2022 like crazy, but as I'm a bit late to the game, I'm feeling slightly overwhelmed. If anyone knows any programs that would fit my interests and that I would be competitive in, I would be extremely grateful for any sense of direction here. I will say that ideally I don't want to take the GRE (as I have to take licensure exams already this summer) but I will if I have to, and I tend to test decent. Thanks in advance!

Edited May 12, 2021 by wynntir

[exitiumax]

While this doesn't directly answer your question, I just want to let that you know that you are not "a bit late to the game" at this point in the year. For Fall 2021, I didn't even begin researching programs until the school year ended in late June (I'm currently a teacher). I didn't begin writing my SoP until mid-to-late summer and I even wrote an entirely knew, originally researched writing sample which I started in August.

In my experience, you're not late to the game by any means.

[wynntir]

23 minutes ago, exitiumax said:

In my experience, you're not late to the game by any means.

Thank you for that. Many of my classmates already have their top universities chosen, fullbrights started, etc. and I guess the constant comparison is getting to me. I'll feel better once I at least have some idea of where I want to go!

[dr. t]

One, you're thinking about PhD applications as if they were undergraduate applications. They're not. Teaching at an inner-city school, being a tour guide, your volunteer or extracurricular activities, are not things doctoral admissions committee will really even look at. Your GPA is perfectly fine to get someone to actually spend some time with the rest of your materials. Whether or not you get into a program pretty much hinges entirely on your articulation of the questions you want to pursue in graduate school and your own perception of yourself as a scholar. 

Reading the above, it sounds to me like you'd greatly benefit from taking some time off from school. Secondary education and history of science are wildly divergent topics. Ask your potential recommenders to write letters and stick them in a drawer for later, finish your undergraduate, go work for a year or three, and then ask yourself if you really want to pursue a PhD, and in what area. 

[wynntir]

4 minutes ago, dr. telkanuru said:

One, you're thinking about PhD applications as if they were undergraduate applications. They're not. Teaching at an inner-city school, being a tour guide, your volunteer or extracurricular activities, are not things doctoral admissions committee will really even look at. Your GPA is perfectly fine to get someone to actually spend some time with the rest of your materials. Whether or not you get into a program pretty much hinges entirely on your articulation of the questions you want to pursue in graduate school and your own perception of yourself as a scholar. 

Reading the above, it sounds to me like you'd greatly benefit from taking some time off from school. Secondary education and history of science are wildly divergent topics. Ask your potential recommenders to write letters and stick them in a drawer for later, finish your undergraduate, go work for a year or three, and then ask yourself if you really want to pursue a PhD, and in what area. 

Thank you for the advice. I guess I should clarify that my ultimate goal is to change the curriculum for secondary education to include more emphasis on the history of disease in the social studies. I assumed that graduate school for education was step one of reaching that goal, but my professor has really been encouraging me to go for a history degree. Either way, it's definitely a unique pulling together of two seemingly unrelated fields. Working as a teacher for awhile is an option, but I'd rather get some more education under my belt so that I can try out curriculum ideas within my school district with research to back me up.

You're definitely right in my viewing this as an undergraduate application. I honestly don't have much frame of reference otherwise. I'm a solid writer with clear goals, but not clear pathways to reach them.

[dr. t]

2 hours ago, wynntir said:

I guess I should clarify that my ultimate goal is to change the curriculum for secondary education to include more emphasis on the history of disease in the social studies. I assumed that graduate school for education was step one of reaching that goal, but my professor has really been encouraging me to go for a history degree.

If your goal is to influence secondary education curricula, I have to admit I'm flummoxed why a professor would push you towards a history degree. Either there's some context I'm missing, or they're simply wrong. A PhD in history prepares you to be a historian, and little else.

I can't speak for Ed.D programs, but a PhD application is about the ideas and vision of past you're bringing to the table. Your grades, language abilities, writing proficiencies, etc. are part of the evaluation process because they speak to your ability to make that vision and those ideas reality. And that's all that matters. 

[exitiumax]

13 hours ago, wynntir said:

Thank you for the advice. I guess I should clarify that my ultimate goal is to change the curriculum for secondary education to include more emphasis on the history of disease in the social studies. I assumed that graduate school for education was step one of reaching that goal, but my professor has really been encouraging me to go for a history degree. Either way, it's definitely a unique pulling together of two seemingly unrelated fields. Working as a teacher for awhile is an option, but I'd rather get some more education under my belt so that I can try out curriculum ideas within my school district with research to back me up.

You're definitely right in my viewing this as an undergraduate application. I honestly don't have much frame of reference otherwise. I'm a solid writer with clear goals, but not clear pathways to reach them.

I, too, was considering an Ed. PhD (not an Ed.D because I wanted to do a research-based degree) but ultimately chose to pursue a History PhD because I was interested in the History of Education. That is an angle you can possibly take with your work. If, instead, you're interested in influencing curriculum, you'd probably be better off pursuing a degree in Ed schools centered around Curriculum & Instruction or Educational Policy. Like @dr. telkanuru mentioned, there seems to be an incongruence in your interests and goals and the paths you're considering.

[wynntir]

3 hours ago, exitiumax said:

I, too, was considering an Ed. PhD (not an Ed.D because I wanted to do a research-based degree) but ultimately chose to pursue a History PhD because I was interested in the History of Education. That is an angle you can possibly take with your work. If, instead, you're interested in influencing curriculum, you'd probably be better off pursuing a degree in Ed schools centered around Curriculum & Instruction or Educational Policy. Like @dr. telkanuru mentioned, there seems to be an incongruence in your interests and goals and the paths you're considering.

My ideal program is with SHEG at Stanford for curriculum studies in history, however, I don't think I have enough experience to apply for that program yet. I was hoping to get a masters in a related history topic to my research plan, then teach for a few years, then apply, but it seems that terminal masters in history of science are rare. Most seem to be granted along the way in PhD programs. Masters of education in my chosen subject area are also few and far inbetween. This is where my dilemma lies.

[AfricanusCrowther]

2 minutes ago, wynntir said:

My ideal program is with SHEG at Stanford for curriculum studies in history, however, I don't think I have enough experience to apply for that program yet. I was hoping to get a masters in a related history topic to my research plan, then teach for a few years, then apply, but it seems that terminal masters in history of science are rare. Most seem to be granted along the way in PhD programs. Masters of education in my chosen subject area are also few and far inbetween. This is where my dilemma lies.

FYI, in almost all universities history of science is one of the fields of study offered by the history department, not a separate department. PhD programs don't care whether your BA or MA is from a history or history of science department. You could easily pursue an MA and work with a historian of science. 

[psstein]

On 5/13/2021 at 2:48 PM, AfricanusCrowther said:

FYI, in almost all universities history of science is one of the fields of study offered by the history department, not a separate department. PhD programs don't care whether your BA or MA is from a history or history of science department. You could easily pursue an MA and work with a historian of science. 

Also worth noting that the vast majority of historians of science teach (e.g.) early modern France with history of science on the side. There aren't too many dedicated historians of science outside departments like Princeton/Harvard/Yale/Hopkins.

To OP: you're asking basically two questions, one is about the history of public health/medicine and the other is about the development of a social/cultural movement. Asking questions about the development of a vaccine (how did they acquire the materials, how was it tested, why did it fail, how did public health officials react, and so on) are questions for historians of medicine.

I would also submit to you that there's a vast, vast literary corpus on public health education as parts of public health campaigns. If this is the area you're most interested in, I'd recommend reading the major journals (e.g. Bulletin for the History of Medicine) and seeing the recent developments in that area.

[wynntir]

Coming back to this to say after some soul searching I've determined a much clearer path for myself in this field. Thanks to all for the advice!